The Myth of Victorian poms of today
In the UK we are currently having a problem with people advertising litters of puppies as "Victorian Poms" or BYB/Puppy Farm bred poms which are nothing like a pom. They are being advertised as poms because poms are a very popular breed here and wanted by many as pets. The problem happens when this puppy bought from the above advertised as a pomeranian grows far bigger and barley resembles the breed. These poms are nothing like the owner saw at shows and on telly and then the pet owner is very upset and dissapointed and i get emails asking why there pom doesn't look like mine. Then you have brake there heart and tell them the truth.
This idea that poms should be bigger and creating a new Victorian pom or bringing back the old type is just an excuse for badly bred dogs used by many who have no interest in the breed and are only out to make money from breeding to sell.
On this page you will find the proof that the victorian pom was not bred out of existance but it was made a breed in it's own right in 1985 and still lives on today all be it a rare breed now.
There is no such thing as a vitorian pom, what people refer to as a victorian pom today was registered at the German Spitz in 1985 and this proof can be found below
If you go and check the history of the breed you will see that what some call the Victorian pom now was registered as a breed in it's own right being the German spitz Klein and Mittel this was in 1985.
Kleins 23-29 cms (9 - 11 ½ inches) Mittels 30-38 cms (12 - 15 inches) Dogs masculine, bitches feminine.
Establishing The Facts
by Janet Edmonds (First Printed April 1988)
I was astounded - and, frankly, more than a little hurt - to read in Breed Notes recently that this breed owes its recognition to April Folly At Tordown, because this simply is not so. I then realised that, of all the people currently in the breed, only Julie and I have been involved in the German Spitz campaign since the very beginning and so perhaps it is time, before the truth becomes too distorted, to set the facts in order.
To follow events, one has to realise that there are several strands to the story which run parallel for a time until they are drawn together and I shall endeavour to give credit where it is due. I have no desire to present a sort of 'alone I done it' picture.
My own interest is first documented in 1975 when, after a lot of thought about a second breed, I wrote to the K.C. to ask whether they would recognise German Kleinspitz as such if they were imported. I received no answer and, since I wasn't yet ready to follow it through I didn't push it at that stage. In the early 1070's, Averil Cawthera, well established in Samoyeds and becoming so in Pomeranians, decided to re-establish the white Pom and to that end imported several Poms from Holland including Tum-Tum van het Vlinderhof of Lireva (Tum-Tum) and Venstein's Mauricia of Lireva (Velvet) in 1975 and 1976 respectively. In, I think, 1977, Rosemary Bridgman bought April Folly at Tordown, a very pretty oversized Pom and brought her to the Nordic. Rosemary knew of my interest in German Kleinspitz and suggested we pool our ideas and efforts and direct them towards restoring recognition of the two sizes of Poms under the apt name 'Victorian' Pomeranian. Since the two things were one and the same, I wasn't much bothered what they were called and agreed.
Later in 1977, Rosemary acquired Tum-Tum and, 1978, Velvet, from Averil who had achieved what she had set out to do. I believe there was some misunderstanding as to why Rosemary wanted them but, as I was not directly involved, I can neither be specific nor make judgements on the matter. I was certainly under the impression that both had been registered as Kleine Keeshond in Holland, and Tum-Tum was undoubtedly of Klein size.
About this time, a colleague, Julie Smith, was thinking of having a dog and, having been shown some Victorian Poms, decided they would suit her very well. She, Rosemary and I then imported - in 1979 - Tefanra-Leona's Lady Xabrina (Minty) on the understanding that Julie and I would buy Rosemary out at a later date. This we did. Minty was, however, always registered in the joint ownership of only myself and Julie and this was with the full agreement of all parties. Minty was registered in Holland as Kleine Keeshond.
When we sent Minty's registration to the K.C. we were somewhat astonished to find them come back as 'Keeshond'! I wrote to the K.C., with Julie's and Rosemary's approval, to say that she was not and that I understood previous Kleine Keeshonden had been registered as Pomeranian. The K.C. did not correct this statement (which I later learned was untrue) and re-processed her registration as Pomeranian.
Minty proved very difficult to breed and, when finally mated to Tum-Tum produced three puppies, each of which was undershot - a fault exhibited by neither parent. This was a shock as Minty had been selected primarily for her compatible bloodlines and we had until then assumed that the undershot mouths had come from the small Pom stock in the background of the oversized Poms. It certainly wasn't a mating we wished to repeat (if you look at my Teazle you will appreciate why!) and I then decided to make my own choice. I went to Austria where German Spitz were said to be of good quality and finally, in 1981 in Vienna bought Prinz Schneeflocke von Cottas (Schani), Austrian-bred but of Czech pedigree and registered in Austria as German Kleinspitz. He, too, was put on the Pom register here.
In the meantime, of course, Folly, Tum-Tum and Velvet had been mated to various British Poms and each other and Folly, in particular, played an important part in extending the colour range.
In the course of the campaign to recognise our dogs, it became obvious to most of us that the opposition from 'small' Pom people made it advisable a) to form a Club and b) that we stood a better chance of recognition if we aimed for a separate breed called 'German Spitz'. Rosemary was - understandably from her point of view - not at all happy about this and at one stage stated her intention of refusing to transfer Tum-Tum and Velvet if that was what the breed was to be called. This was when we learned that they had, in fact, despite their size been registered not as Kleine Keeshonden, but as Poms (Dwerg Keeshond) in Holland.
There had never been any doubt that Minty and Schani were, and always had been, registered as Kleinspitz and therefore they and their progeny were in fact the only true - in a purely technical sense - German Spitz in the country. Since it was obvious the campaign wasn't going to go away, the K.C. finally - and we owe a great debt of gratitude to Mike Stockman for his efforts on our behalf - agreed not only to recognise the breed and include Minty, Schani and their progeny but also to include Tum-Tum, Velvet and theirs, if the owners wished it.
Folly therefore came into the breed largely through her progeny by Tum-Tum and undoubtedly contributed to colour but not to the breed's recognition, for which she was never eligible. Minty has had very little genetic influence on the breed but Schani has - despite comments by his detractors, most of whom have never seen him - passed on his own superb coat, head, temperament and soundness and, on the debit side, a tendency to length of loin. However, put quite bluntly, if Julie and I had not been prepared to put our money where our mouths are and import two German Spitz with no guarantee of correct recognition, the campaign would have failed and you would still be trying to gain acceptance for oversized Poms. More probably, most readers of this wouldn't have got involved at all.
All facts in this article are matters of record, either in minute books or in my files and I have endeavoured to present them as factually as possible. I do find it ironic, however, that Breed Notes concerning the recognition of the breed in this country can totally ignore two dogs without whom there would have been no recognition. It would be nice to feel that a little more care and accuracy could be employed in the future and two much-loved dogs be given the credit they rightly deserve.
© Janet Edmonds
Report To KC For Breed Recognition
by Malcolm Willis (First Printed March 1984)
Report to the KC Breed Standards/Registrations Committee on German Spitz (Klein)/ German Spitz (Mittel)
I was asked to make recommendations with regard to registration procedure for German Spitz currently registered as Pomeranians and for the methods of 'grading up' from Pomeranians to German Spitz. This report is intended to cover these points and has been discussed with representatives of the German Spitz Club
ESTABLISHMENT OF SEPARATE REGISTERS
In cattle breeds it is generally held that four or five top crosses with a particular pure bred bull will allow upgraded stock to be recorded as 'pure bred'. Five top crosses would convert to 96.87% pure and four to 93.75% pure. In my view it would be acceptable to settle for four top crosses with German Spitz before a Pomeranian can be classified as German Spitz (Klein or Mittel). It does not require the crosses to be male and use of pure bred German Spitz females will be equally acceptable.
Diagramatically the procedure would be as follows using four grading registers designated A,B,C and D to represent different grades of crossing the procedure:
There are complications in respect of Klein and Mittel. Ideally a register should be set up for each development stage towards each breed but that may be impracticable. I would therefore suggest that two pure bred registers be established, one for German Spitz (Klein) and one for German Spitz (Mittel). The development registers A,B,C and D should be combined as far as Klein and Mittel are concerned and at the stage of the fourth cross being produced, the litter (In its entirety) so born would be recorded as being either Klein or Mittel. From that stage the animals will be kept separate except when used on Development register stock. Hopefully German Spitz breeders will work on the principla of using top crosses with Klein stock throughout or with Mittel stock throughout to get the required type.
ALLOCATION TO REGISTERS
My allocations are appended, listed by the register they should belong to. In the case of some animals the percentage German Spitz 'blood' is less that 50 and is either 25 or 12.5%. Strictly speaking, these do not belong in any register being intermediate between A and B. I feel however, that it would be most logical to insert these in register B as a start.
Hopefully all animals in A,B,C and D will be mated to stock which are 100% German Spitz, i.e. in the pure bred register. In view of the limited numbers this might not be feasible without serious inbreeding problems. Accordingly matings may take place between animals in various of the development registers. Thus we may mate two register B animals together.
Our procedure should then be as follows:
Intermating with development register animals should be permitted as a means of enlarging the gene pool but animals so born must be registered in the lower of the two registers from which the parents cam. Thus B with C goes in B, C with D goes in C.
LENGTH OF TIME REGISTERS SHOULD BE OPEN
I think a period of three years from establishment of German Spitz registers should suffice for allowing Poms to be recorded as register A stock. After that time register A should be closed. Registers B, C and D should be closed progressively as animals filter through the system but at this stage I do not think we should put a time limit on them. I feel that a ten year minimum is needed to allow numbers to build.
This is illustrated in the following table for the dogs Tum Tum vh Vlinderhof of Lireva (Male), April Folly at Tordown (Female) and Venestiens Mauricia of Lireva (Female). Relationshp to these three is shown in percentage terms.
Numbers of animals with percentage 'blood' from Tum-Tum, Folly and Mauricia
The number of dogs in each column is 48, the 49th being the animal itself. In working out percentage influence overall totals have been divided by 46 (i.e. excluding the three dogs named).
In effect, Tum Tum is grandsire to the population and the other two are each equivalent to great grand-dams. This is high reliance on a small number of dogs and the need for more imports of differing lines is paramount.
The German Spitz Club does keep litter records and hopefully will persist in this as a means of keeping an eye open for defects. None may have appeared in bulk but numbers are small and many defects take time to emerge.
German Spitz breeders may wish to gain full pedigree/purebred status faster but there are no shortcuts to up-grading and the best solution for an increase in numbers is to import animals in bulk.
Dogs to be registered in each of the registers after being removed from the Pom. register. Numbers preceding names are German Spitz Club numbers.
FOR REGISTER A (POMS)
FOR REGISTER B (ONE TOP CROSS)
FOR REGISTER C (TWO TOP CROSSES)
FOR REGISTER D (THREE TOP CROSSES)
PURE BRED GERMAN SPITZ REGISTER
In my view registrations should be made of all these even if no longer alive and no fee should be charged to the owners who have registered them already.